Request for negatives has been sent, withdrawals are trickling in. Charlie notes that progress on the SAIF CD that Thomas Erl has picked up a notion for an article in his magazine and OACIS interested in harmonizing with it in November. ArB is working on glossary for DSTU version in OWL. John asks about timeliness for harmonization with OACIS; they’re going to look for cross references and any contradictions, more of an alignment rather than the HL7 concept of harmonization. Kai and Rene posted a 17 minute intro to SAIF video.

Vote: unanimously approved

What URL do we allow Thomas Erl to link to for others to read about SAIF? Charlie feels we should make it available to everyone. John notes that this must go through HQ to release the IP. If the TSC

Motion: Approve the free distribution without restrictions of the HL7 SAIF CD with understanding that HL7 holds copyright to the document, John seconds. This is with the understanding that the consecutive HL7 IG will be restricted to membership IP. John asks Charlie to write up a half-page justification for him to use. (Action Item)

John is aware of and encouraging this activity. There will be funding for tooling next year though there is not a specific plan for it at this time. This kind of information is needed for decision making on this funding. Ravi asks if the project is related to the communications plan which will drive what goes on the dashboard. Tooling has chosen to create projects at this level of granularity. They are all tied together. They are trying to work on tools outside the balloting and publication process for use outside of standards development. Coordination with OHT will be needed. Ravi would like to see a more in-depth success criteria. Discussion ensured regarding whether GForge is insufficient as the focal point; better visibility is needed. Ravi notes that maintenance of the dashboard is the issue, rather than a one-time issuance of a dashboard status.

Ongoing maintenance of the communications plan will be to treat it as a living document. Austin asks how the communications plan will be approved. Patrick would have to take this back to the Tooling group. John notes it would include factors outside the TSC including Marketing and the Board as well as OHT. Bob and Chuck would need to review it. Does the TSC wish to review it, as the tactical arm of the organization? John would at a minimum need to approve it. Austin suggests that since external communication is needed that the approval process be documented. ACTION ITEM: Patrick will take that back.

They may need to review their process against the process for approving new processes as was just approved by TSC. Bringing in requirements from other work groups should be formalized in a new process. Woody reminds the group that the Tooling WG is effectively four people. Judgment should be exercised for which processes require the formality of approving new processes.